Literature DB >> 17919837

Planning target margin calculations for prostate radiotherapy based on intrafraction and interfraction motion using four localization methods.

Chris Beltran1, Michael G Herman, Brian J Davis.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine planning target volume (PTV) margins for prostate radiotherapy based on the internal margin (IM) (intrafractional motion) and the setup margin (SM) (interfractional motion) for four daily localization methods: skin marks (tattoo), pelvic bony anatomy (bone), intraprostatic gold seeds using a 5-mm action threshold, and using no threshold. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Forty prostate cancer patients were treated with external radiotherapy according to an online localization protocol using four intraprostatic gold seeds and electronic portal images (EPIs). Daily localization and treatment EPIs were obtained. These data allowed inter- and intrafractional analysis of prostate motion. The SM for the four daily localization methods and the IM were determined.
RESULTS: A total of 1532 fractions were analyzed. Tattoo localization requires a SM of 6.8 mm left-right (LR), 7.2 mm inferior-superior (IS), and 9.8 mm anterior-posterior (AP). Bone localization requires 3.1, 8.9, and 10.7 mm, respectively. The 5-mm threshold localization requires 4.0, 3.9, and 3.7 mm. No threshold localization requires 3.4, 3.2, and 3.2 mm. The intrafractional prostate motion requires an IM of 2.4 mm LR, 3.4 mm IS and AP. The PTV margin using the 5-mm threshold, including interobserver uncertainty, IM, and SM, is 4.8 mm LR, 5.4 mm IS, and 5.2 mm AP.
CONCLUSIONS: Localization based on EPI with implanted gold seeds allows a large PTV margin reduction when compared with tattoo localization. Except for the LR direction, bony anatomy localization does not decrease the margins compared with tattoo localization. Intrafractional prostate motion is a limiting factor on margin reduction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17919837     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.08.040

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  48 in total

1.  Motion-compensated estimation of delivered dose during external beam radiation therapy: implementation in Philips' Pinnacle(3) treatment planning system.

Authors:  Shyam Bharat; Parag Parikh; Camille Noel; Michael Meltsner; Karl Bzdusek; Michael Kaus
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Uncertainties and CTV to PTV margins quantitative assessment using cone-beam CT technique in clinical application for prostate, and head and neck irradiation tumours.

Authors:  X J Juan-Senabre; J López-Tarjuelo; A Conde-Moreno; A Santos-Serra; A L Sánchez-Iglesias; J D Quirós-Higueras; N de Marco Blancas; S Calzada-Feliu; C Ferrer-Albiach
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 3.405

3.  Influence of the type of imaging on the delineation process during the treatment planning.

Authors:  Weronika Jackowiak; Bartosz Bąk; Anna Kowalik; Adam Ryczkowski; Małgorzata Skórska; Małgorzata Paszek-Widzińska
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2015-06-18

4.  Comparison of prostate positioning guided by three-dimensional transperineal ultrasound and cone beam CT.

Authors:  Minglun Li; Hendrik Ballhausen; Nina-Sophie Hegemann; Michael Reiner; Stefan Tritschler; Christian Gratzke; Farkhad Manapov; Stefanie Corradini; Ute Ganswindt; Claus Belka
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2016-12-07       Impact factor: 3.621

5.  Shorter treatment times reduce the impact of intra-fractional motion : A real-time 4DUS study comparing VMAT vs. step-and-shoot IMRT for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Hendrik Ballhausen; Minglun Li; Ute Ganswindt; Claus Belka
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 3.621

6.  Planning target volume margins for prostate radiotherapy using daily electronic portal imaging and implanted fiducial markers.

Authors:  David Skarsgard; Pat Cadman; Ali El-Gayed; Robert Pearcey; Patricia Tai; Nadeem Pervez; Jackson Wu
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2010-06-10       Impact factor: 3.481

7.  Dosimetric impact of intrafractional patient motion in pediatric brain tumor patients.

Authors:  Chris Beltran; John Trussell; Thomas E Merchant
Journal:  Med Dosim       Date:  2009-02-07       Impact factor: 1.482

8.  Prostate cancer treated with image-guided helical TomoTherapy® and image-guided LINAC-IMRT : Correlation between high-dose bladder volume, margin reduction, and genitourinary toxicity.

Authors:  Sonia Drozdz; Michael Schwedas; Henning Salz; Susan Foller; Thomas G Wendt
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 3.621

9.  A dosimetric selectivity intercomparison of HDR brachytherapy, IMRT and helical tomotherapy in prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Authors:  Johanne Hermesse; Sylvie Biver; Nicolas Jansen; Eric Lenaerts; Nathalie De Patoul; Stefaan Vynckier; Philippe Coucke; Pierre Scalliet; Philippe Nickers
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 3.621

10.  Intra-fractional uncertainties in image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Buelent Polat; Iris Guenther; Juergen Wilbert; Joachim Goebel; Reinhart A Sweeney; Michael Flentje; Matthias Guckenberger
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2008-12-24       Impact factor: 3.621

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.